Poll: BFRs are for pilots who don't fly enough

[dmccormack]

I was sorta with you Jay.

But I've learned plenty from "young CFIs."

The "young CFI" who did my tailwheel transition knew plenty and helped me immensely.

I've also been around BTDT types who are bored and not very eager to share knowledge or expertise.

 

[twdeckard]

If the 14 elements of the PTS are not sufficiently challenging you can layer on emergencies and distractions until its an hour long workout.

I am thinking of an IPC which involved a mock electrical fire, "don't just point to the fire extinguisher, unlatch it! get it out!" "electrical is all off, so no autopilot" "only one shot at this with the handheld and your drifting"

... I am sure a FR could be made equally challenging without being unreasonable.

For my part our club insists on 61.56 reviews every calendar year. In my case the scrutiny on even the fundamentals is invaluable ...

 

[JeffDG]

i'm actually facing my first flight review ever in september. i suppose 8 years without one is a decent run.

Go learn to fly a hot air baloon...good for another two years...c'mon, you can make 10!

 

[tonycondon]

Go learn to fly a hot air baloon...good for another two years...c'mon, you can make 10!

i actually might enjoy that. but i already have enough trouble waking up in the morning, my understanding is propane is pretty expensive, and no one flies balloons around here, what with the 30-40 mph winds and all.

 

[JeffDG]

i actually might enjoy that. but i already have enough trouble waking up in the morning, my understanding is propane is pretty expensive, and no one flies balloons around here, what with the 30-40 mph winds and all.

Powered parachute? Gyroplane? Weight shift control?

 

[Dr. O]

I doubt that many of us can go right out and pass the written and oral and PTS for all of our ratings...

- me excluded of course because I am the best that ever was!
(for the humor impaired, that is sarcasm)

I have no axe to grind against the biennial... I do try to make it fun and use it to do something I haven't done in a long time... I'm thinking this one needs to be a refresher in an open cockpit, radial engined, biplane...

denny-o

 

[EdFred]

I doubt that many of us can go right out and pass the written and oral and PTS for all of our ratings...

- me excluded of course because I am the best that ever was!
(for the humor impaired, that is sarcasm)

I have no axe to grind against the biennial... I do try to make it fun and use it to do something I haven't done in a long time... I'm thinking this one needs to be a refresher in an open cockpit, radial engined, biplane...

denny-o

Is that a challenge? I took a practice instrument written a couple weeks ago because I was considering getting my -II instead of renewing. 85% and I hadn't cracked open any instrument material since 2004. I scored a 90% when I took it originally. Pretty good retention I'd say.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

I don't necessarily think FRs will change anyone's attitude, though, and I'm not convinced they weed out too many people either.

I suspect that some that need to be "weeded" just don't bother.

Of the 4 aircraft I dug into recently, at least two (one I know fer-sher, one purd-darn sure) were operated by uncertificated pilots at some point.

 

[Everskyward]

But I've learned plenty from "young CFIs."

The "young CFI" who did my tailwheel transition knew plenty and helped me immensely.

I've also been around BTDT types who are bored and not very eager to share knowledge or expertise.

I agree. I don't think it's so much about someone's age as it is someone's attitude. I've had young instructors who I liked a lot and older ones who I preferred not to use again. It's also much better if the student and the CFI are on the same page both in terms of goals and personality. One set of people may mesh where another set may not. As someone gets more experience with flying it becomes somewhat easier to glean information from most people, but for a newer pilot it is harder because they don't know what questions to ask.

 

[Jay Honeck]

I don't think it's so much about someone's age as it is someone's attitude. I've had young instructors who I liked a lot and older ones who I preferred not to use again.

Okay, "young CFI" may have been a poor choice of words on my part.

The kind of guys who are intent on "teaching you something" on a BFR, no matter how inane, aren't always "young". But in my experience they have fit one of these two distinctly different profiles:

The Young Ones
1. Up and coming CFI at the local flight school
2. On the fast-track to the majors.
3. Never flies "for fun".
4. Thinks they will die on any approach below 95 knots. (All they've flown in the last six months are King Airs... )
5. Never does primary flight instruction.

*or*

The Old(er) Ones
1. Recently obtained their CFI certificate
2. Work full-time in a non-aviation field
3. They fly to support their other business
4. True "students of aviation" -- and they want to share it.
5. Never does primary flight instruction.

Again, these aren't "bad" people, or "bad" CFIs, in any sense of the word. Both types feel an intense need or desire to put you through your paces in a BFR, and will work their butts (and yours) off to ensure that it happens.

The former group does it because it feeds their ego, I suspect, while the latter group does it because they truly believe that this is what BFRs are all about, and they simply love to teach. They've worked their butts off to obtain that CFI certificate, and they are going to USE it, dammit!

The end result is the same, although I think we all enjoy the latter group more. :wink2: Enthusiasm is infectious.

Still, if you fly a couple of times per week, and your skills are sharp, at some level a BFR should be a phase check, an assessment of your basic skills, designed by law to ensure that the sky isn't full of crazy or incompetent pilots.

In my case, I was very glad to have the chance to fly with an old salt, a man with more flight time and experience than I will EVER attain (he was an Air Traffic Controller for over 40 years, too), who had the experience and self-confidence to be able to make an assessment quickly and easily.

 

[Everskyward]

But in my experience they have fit one of these two distinctly different profiles:

My experience has been different. I don't think you can categorize people into profiles based on their background. Everyone is an individual. I have known older, part-time CFIs whose heads were so big that I wondered if it would fit through the airplane door. I've also known great younger CFIs who went to major aviation universities.

 

[NC Pilot]

I've never gone for a BFR or IPC where both and instructor and I didn't learn something. That is not a bad thing and I will do these every year.

Cheap insurance IMHO.

 

[Jay Honeck]

My experience has been different. I don't think you can categorize people into profiles based on their background. Everyone is an individual.

Really? :wink2:

Actually, after 9 years in the motel biz, and 21 years in newspapers, interacting on a personal level with tens of thousands of people, I'm fairly-well convinced that there are really only about 12 different types of people in the world. The differences are really just subtle variations on a theme.

Some day, when I have time to write my book, I'll flesh them out for y'all...

(I've got friends in law enforcement that insist that I'm wrong; there are really only two types: jerk-asses, and you and me... )

 

[Everskyward]

Really? :wink2:

Really. Some folks like to pigeonhole and stereotype people. I prefer not to do that because I have been surprised before at how wrong my preconceived notions about someone have been based on their background.

 

[dmccormack]

My experience has been different. I don't think you can categorize people into profiles based on their background. Everyone is an individual. I have known older, part-time CFIs whose heads were so big that I wondered if it would fit through the airplane door. I've also known great younger CFIs who went to major aviation universities.

Precisely right.

 

[gismo]

I saw your other post advocating an online course. Is that the answer? Is our current kill rate the best we can hope for? Is your position that no training is the same as some training? How would you make whatever we do more meaningful?

Don't get me wrong, I believe in recurrent training and participate to the tune of about 6 hrs of sim time and occasional hour or two of airwork with a good CFI just about every year. But all that's good for is stick and rudder skills and IME rarely offers much opportunity to learn ADM skills. And unless we find a way to improve pilot performance in that area the "kill rate" isn't going to improve much because that's where the vast majority of fatalities come from.

I got no dog in this fight, have done hundreds of FR's for friends over the years and have yet to charge anybody a dime. I'm just ashamed to be part of such a bunch of dumb shlts that continues to kill themselves and their passengers at the current rate.

I hope you didn't take my jab at CFI's too seriously, I'm friends with a large number of instructors and I can't say that a single one views BFRs as a way to pad their (meager in too many cases) wallets. But your "dumb sh**s" comment speaks to my position. Do you have much hope that your generous behavior has made any d--- s--- pilot significantly less dumb?

As to the online training idea, I haven't seen anything that I believe would do that yet but I do believe the potential is there (if there's any hope of improving ADM in general).

 

[Tim]

I thought they where for building up CFI's hours

 

[Maxmosbey]

Okay, "young CFI" may have been a poor choice of words on my part.

The kind of guys who are intent on "teaching you something" on a BFR, no matter how inane, aren't always "young". But in my experience they have fit one of these two distinctly different profiles:

The Young Ones
1. Up and coming CFI at the local flight school
2. On the fast-track to the majors.
3. Never flies "for fun".
4. Thinks they will die on any approach below 95 knots. (All they've flown in the last six months are King Airs... )
5. Never does primary flight instruction.

*or*

The Old(er) Ones
1. Recently obtained their CFI certificate
2. Work full-time in a non-aviation field
3. They fly to support their other business
4. True "students of aviation" -- and they want to share it.
5. Never does primary flight instruction.

Again, these aren't "bad" people, or "bad" CFIs, in any sense of the word. Both types feel an intense need or desire to put you through your paces in a BFR, and will work their butts (and yours) off to ensure that it happens.

The former group does it because it feeds their ego, I suspect, while the latter group does it because they truly believe that this is what BFRs are all about, and they simply love to teach. They've worked their butts off to obtain that CFI certificate, and they are going to USE it, dammit!

The end result is the same, although I think we all enjoy the latter group more. :wink2: Enthusiasm is infectious.

Still, if you fly a couple of times per week, and your skills are sharp, at some level a BFR should be a phase check, an assessment of your basic skills, designed by law to ensure that the sky isn't full of crazy or incompetent pilots.

In my case, I was very glad to have the chance to fly with an old salt, a man with more flight time and experience than I will EVER attain (he was an Air Traffic Controller for over 40 years, too), who had the experience and self-confidence to be able to make an assessment quickly and easily.

Frankly Jay, I think that you like to generalize too much. Personally, I like young people. The ones that I tend to run into have a good attitude about things. A lot of older people that I deal with like to postulate, tell war stories, and try to convince me how much they know. My first instructor was an older guy. He was a WWII Navy pilot. No complaints. He knew what he was doing, and he was a pretty good teacher. After a twenty some year hiatus from flying, I picked a twenty-one year old pup to get me back up to speed instead of some old salt, like my first instructor. Not only was he a darn good pilot, but he was a very good teacher as well. I like to learn. Young or old, I pick em because I think they can teach me something. Not just with flying, I learn a lot about a lot of things from young people.

 

[tdager]

How do we reconcile GA's deplorable safety record that is universally acknowledged to be more than 80% pilot stupidity with objections to more training?

I hear these words, such as "deplorable" and I have to question the validity of them.

Do we have crashes? Yup...will we always have crashes? Yup. Will most be due to pilot error? Yup.

So at what level do we accept the risk and say "anything beyond this point is not beneficial".

We are not, will not be, and should not be, held to commercial airline/ATP standards. They rarely crash for a reason....heavy regulation, two pilots, etc. If we set them as what one can do by such regulation, and accept that we do not have to meet that, we should also accept that we will have more crashes do to "stupid pilot tricks" and get over it already.